Transmission of lumpy skin disease virus: A short review.

Lumpy skin disease (LSD) is a viral transboundary disease endemic throughout Africa and of high economic importance that affects cattle and domestic water buffaloes. Since 2012, the disease has spread rapidly and widely throughout the Middle Eastern and Balkan regions, southern Caucasus and parts of the Russian Federation. Before vaccination campaigns took their full effect, the disease continued spreading from region to region, mainly showing seasonal patterns despite implementing control and eradication measures. The disease is capable of appearing several hundred kilometers away from initial (focal) outbreak sites within a short time period. These incursions have triggered a long-awaited renewed scientific interest in LSD resulting in the initiation of novel research into broad aspects of the disease, including epidemiology, modes of transmission and associated risk factors. Long-distance dispersal of LSDV seems to occur via the movement of infected animals, but distinct seasonal patterns indicate that arthropod-borne transmission is most likely responsible for the swift and aggressive short-distance spread of the disease. Elucidating the mechanisms of transmission of LSDV will enable the development of more targeted and effective actions for containment and eradication of the virus. The mode of vector-borne transmission of the disease is most likely mechanical, but there is no clear-cut evidence to confirm or disprove this assumption. To date, the most likely vectors for LSDV transmission are blood-sucking arthropods such as stable flies (Stomoxys calcitrans), mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti), and hard ticks (Rhipicephalus and Amblyomma species). New evidence suggests that the ubiquitous, synanthropic house fly, Musca domestica, may also play a role in LSDV transmission, but this has not yet been tested in a clinical setting. The aim of this review is to compile and discuss the earlier as well as the most recent research data on the transmission of LSDV.

Determination of lumpy skin disease virus in bovine meat and offal products following experimental infection.

Lumpy skin disease (LSD) has recently expanded its range northwards to include the Balkans, Turkey and Russia. Because there was no solid evidence conclusively verifying the transmission mechanism in the field and LSDV viraemic animals with overt and asymptomatic presentation of disease and their products may represent a risk as an indirect transmission pathway. In this work, we used PCR positivity and infectivity in clinical and subclinical infection to evaluate the safety of meat and offal products from cows infected with the virulent LSDV strain Russia/Dagestan/2015. At day 21 post infection, seven of the 12 animals developed the generalized disease, and four animals became subclinically infected without apparent clinical signs. Upon examination and necropsy, the animals with the generalized disease had skin lesions; noticeably enlarged lymph nodes; and lesions in the lungs, trachea and testicles; whereas subclinically ill animals exhibited only enlarged lymph nodes and fever. For both disease presentations, testing of skeletal meat by PCR and virus isolation showed that the skeletal meat did not contain live virus or viral genome, whereas in cattle with generalized disease, meat with gross pathology physically connected under the site of a skin lesion was positive for the live virus. In subclinical infection, only enlarged lymph nodes carried the infectious virus, while the other internal organs tested in both types of disease manifestation were negative except for the testicles. Overall, our findings demonstrate that clinically and subclinically infected animals are reservoirs of live LSDV in lymph nodes and testicles, whereas deep skeletal meat in both types of infection do not carry live virus and the risk of transmission through this product seems very low. The detection of LSDV in testicular tissues in subclinically ill animals is concerning because of the potential to spread infection through contaminated semen. This aspect requires reconsideration of surveillance programmes to identify these Trojan horses of LSDV infection.